Article by Jen Schmidt, Sam Winebaum, Jeff Valliere, Adam Glueck, and Dom Layfield
Hoka Rocket X Trail ($250)
Introduction
Sam: The Rocket X Trail soars to new heights in traildom with one of the stack height trail runner we have ever tested and most likely the highest ever. And no surprise, as Hoka originated the max cushion trail runner way back in 2009 with the OG Mafate which towered over the minimal shoes of the era and then some!
With a full stack height of about 45mm heel / 39 mm forefoot, Hoka is seeking to maximize the light weight and highly reactive nature of the state of the art A-TPU midsole foam (and lots of it!).
A carbon H-shaped plate and notably broad at the ground platform stabilizes and provides propulsion. With a gravel, light trail and road focused 3mm lug outsole (yet one with sharp lugs), and a light yet supportive upper, the weight of a US9 is a mere 9.2 oz / 261g.
“Concept car” or player? Where does the Rocket X Trail shine and where does it struggle? On the player part we know it is a proven performer as Ludo Pommert wore exactly this shoe to move from 50th place to 5th at the 2024 UTMB on the “smoother parts” of the trail and Jim Walmsley wore them from Michigan Bluffs to the finish in 2024 to run the second fastest time in Western States history.
We dig deep and share our findings in the review.
Dom: Do you want to use the same gear that the professionals do? It’s a seductive, but dangerous idea. You know that the elites are going to use everything they possibly can to give them an edge over their opponents, and you’d like a piece of that too. In some sports, the equipment the pros use is profoundly unfriendly to mortals, but at least on road, the evidence suggests that ordinary runners experience at least as much – and possibly more – benefit from hi-tech supershoes. For trail, the waters may be a little murkier, but it remains a very natural instinct to believe that at least some of the magic of our heroes may percolate down when you lace up the latest and greatest.
Dom: However, if you’ve been watching Hoka athletes at marquee events over the last year or two, you’ll have noticed that they have often not been wearing the Tecton X 3, Hoka’s top-of-the-line ultrarunning shoe. Instead we have seen a diverse mix, with a large number of Tecton X “2.5’s” (I put the inverted commas because it’s not entirely clear that what they wore was actually the same factory-standard shoe) and a number of unreleased prototypes. Outside the walls of Hoka’s secret Chocolate Factory, we’ll probably never know the details, but with the Rocket X Trail, the general public gets their first opportunity to buy something supposedly originating from this hotbed of innovation.
Dom: Nominally based on Hoka’s Rocket X 3 road shoe, the Rocket X trail is a high-stack, carbon-plated monster.
Pros:
Very light for the stack height and cushion: Jen/Sam/Jeff V
Breathable upper is great for hot weather: Jen/Sam/Jeff V
Generous amount of superfoam in the midsole: Jen/Sam/Jeff V
Big rebound off the broad 125mm front: Sam/Jeff V
Effective and not overly aggressive carbon plate: Sam/Jeff V
Adequate low profile outsole with aggressive lug shapes is also smooth on road: Sam/Jen/Jeff V
Cons:
Fits half size small: Sam/Jeff V/Dom
Not the most stable on technical terrain due to very high stack height and broad platform: Jen/Sam/Jeff V/Dom
Oversized heel favors heel-strikers: Dom
Pointy toebox presses big toe medially: Dom
Stats
Approx. Weight: men's 9.2 oz / 261g US9
Sample Weights:
men’s 9.4 oz / 267g US 9.5 (fits like a US9)
US M10.5 (fits like US M10.0) 9.6 oz / 276 g
US M10.5 (fits like US M10.0) 9.8 oz / 279 g
women’s 8.8 oz / 250 g US9
Full Stack Height: 45 mm heel / 39 mm forefoot
Platform Width:
Rocket X Trail 100 mm heel / 85 mm midfoot / 125 mm forefoot US9.5
Tecton X3 100mm heel / 80mm midfoot / 120mm forefoot US10
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Jen: After highlighting the Mafate X just a couple months ago at Western States, HOKA is back with another long-distance trail shoe. The Rocket X Trail is lightweight, features a carbon plate and superfoam midsole, and was apparently designed for gravel racing, a niche that differentiates it from last fall’s Tecton X3 (a racer for more technical trails) and the aforementioned Mafate X (an ultra-distance tank).
The Rocket X Trail is a big shoe. I dug out my Tecton X3’s for comparison, a shoe that had seemed massive when I first got it, and was struck by how much larger the Rocket X Trail is.
Granted, I was sent a half size up from my usual US W8.5, but the Rocket is a full 10 mm wider in both the heel and forefoot and 5 mm wider in the midfoot in my samples.
The difference in stack height is (45/39mm forefoot/heel in the Rocket X Trail and 40/35 mm in the Tecton X3), it feels like more. Still, it’s light: even with the extra width and height, it’s only about 10 g heavier than the Tecton X3 (and again, the comparison is between a US W9 vs. US W8.5, so the true difference is likely much smaller).
The upper is designed to be light and flexible, with a breathable engineered mesh upper over flexible neon reinforcements. A patent is pending on the “dynamic vamp”, though it doesn’t seem to stretch as much as the name would suggest. The tongue is minimal with a flexible, stretchy gusset. I found that the upper locked down quite nicely for a secure hold through the midfoot, even with the half size up.
Sam: The Rocket X Trail is huge in all dimensions and at the same time incredibly light for its stature. Obviously, I was worried about such heights on trail but the very broad platform gave me some comfort (stability and for sure cushioning)
My US9.5 (equivalent in fit to a US9) weighs a mere 9.4 oz / 267g and this on the broadest forefoot trail platform I can recall at 125mm (110-115mm most common). The heel is also broad at 100mm (few shoes are over 90mm) with the midfoot 85mm, more conventional for an ultra type shoe.
The intent is to use the very reactive A-TPU foam as a front launch pad with the H shaped carbon plate, which is essentially two parallel plates connected at the front with a ba,r stabilizing all that foam while keeping the 45 mm heel broad enough to keep things under control on landings. It all works very well on the right “terrain”.
The upper is a thin non stretch engineered mesh with many pliable midfoot yellow underlays with the somewhat more substantial white ones also forming a quite pliable but extensive toe bumper.
Combined with the thin tongue and the “dynamic vamp”, the idea here is to closely conform the upper to the foot at the lightest possible weight without suffocating or rigid structure.
It works surprisingly well for the intended smooth trails purposes. And speaking of suffocating this is one breathable upper as all of my runs have been in high heat and humidity and comfortable. This is clearly an upper designed for warm conditions such as those at Western States.
The heel counter is rigid and quite low at the Achilles, but in a smart move, given it is low its rear collars are more deeply padded than usual for a race shoe for a great hold even in my oversized pair.
I was sent a full size up from my normal 8.5 and.. with thicker socks the sizing works with correct length and generous but not crazy sloppy volume so for sure they run a half size small for me.
Given the volume (more than length) in my oversize pair I have to cinch the laces quite snuggly but have had no lace bite issues. And we have crinkle cut laces which hold tension well.
Jeff V: Out of the box, I am struck by the combination of stack, overall size and overall light weight. The upper is exceptionally minimal for such a big, high stack shoe, but upon initial step in, it is evident that it is quite well held and effective.
The thin engineered mesh is pliable, flexible and quite breathable, but I am impressed that it is so comfortable and provides an excellent foothold for the less technical intent of the shoe. The heel is well structured, well padded, well held and comfortable, with the crinkle cut laces providing very good lockdown.
There is not much of a toe bumper, as it is pretty much just a thicker, more reinforced section of the forward part of the toe box.
While the “toe bumper” is thin, it is not an issue given a) the shoe is not really meant for trails that are technical enough for that to really matter and b) your foot is riding higher and unlikely to bang a rock.
The tongue is paper thin and gusseted, but it lays well over the foot with minimal adjusting and is quite comfortable.
The heel collar is low, fitting perfectly below my ankle bone.
Hoka appropriately sent me a size 10.5 without any questioning or conversation ahead of time, knowing that I typically wear a size 10.
At a half size up above my normal size, they fit me perfectly, with a secure lock down in the heel, midfoot and toe box, with almost a thumbs width of space forward of my big toe. I wouldn’t call the toe box spacious, but has ample room for foot swell, splay and overall comfort for longer runs (the thin nature of the upper allows for some forgiveness here). If you are usually borderline on sizing up in other shoes, wear thick socks or just prefer a bit more room, you may consider going a full size up above normal.
With the fit caveats out of the way, I find foothold to be very good and in line with the purpose of the shoe. I have tested on my usual steep, rocky, technical trails in the foothills above Boulder and considering the stack and minimal upper, they performed better than I expected, as my feet did not slide or waver, although I felt like the overall size, stack and stiffness had me more limited in technical terrain, feeling somewhat tippy. While running on less steep, smoother trails or dirt roads at high speed (or any speed), then the upper really shines, feeling quite confidence inspiring, breathable and I had no hot spots or constricting points.
Adam: The Rocket X Trail is an absolutely massive trail shoe, to the point where I wondered if it would even be capable of providing stability and predictability on trail, or even being light enough to be runnable. I have very few road shoes that match this stack, let alone trail shoes.
Hoka sent me an 11.5, a half size larger than I normally wear, which I think was the right size for me in this shoe. The upper is extremely thin, but with a well cushioned heel cup, excellent laces that hold tension well, and excellent breathability. When I first put the shoe on, I found the upper felt very comfortable, but without being loose anywhere and a little bit of room to splay the toes for my relatively narrow feet. In particular, I was impressed with the feel of the shoe.
The step in feel was soft, due to the massive stack height, but the foam was firm enough that it felt direct and responsive, with the wide outrigger like heel providing good stability. Initially, the shoe feels premium, comfortable, and incredibly light for the amount of stack and protection it provides.
Dom: The first thing I noticed about the Rocket X Trail was the forefoot rocker. I’ve tested many heavily-rockered race-oriented trail shoes, but the RXT forefoot has more forefoot rocker than anything else I’ve seen. With the RXT, as soon as you shift your weight to the ball of your foot, the shoe immediately starts to tip forward, a sensation that I recall striking me way back when I first tried on a pair of (then ground-breaking) the original Nike Vaporfly 4%. In this way, the RXT reveals its road-shoe roots. The Nike VF4% was terrifyingly unstable off road, and thankfully the RXT is nowhere near as hazardous, but I do think that this aggressive forward roll makes the shoe feel a little jittery.
Dom: The RXT heel, too, feels more like a road shoe. Compared to a Tecton X 3, the stack is slightly higher, and the sole has been widened to add stability. To my mind, the result is a heel that feels generally overbuilt (reminiscent of the Hoka Challenger 7). Even on smooth ground, as a predominantly forefoot-striker, the heel felt like a wall of foam that I needed to overcome in order to get weight onto the front of the shoe.
Dom: The other reviewers have discussed construction details of the upper, so I’ll confine myself to a few specific points. Firstly the primary fabric is a very tough mesh reinforced with an underlay web. It’s very breathable, and seems (so far) to be durable. The only downside is that it lacks stretch, so comfort is not quite as good as e.g. the Tecton X 3, which has a stretchy vamp in the forefoot. On the other hand, foot lockdown is impeccable, a key trait for a running shoe with this much stack height. I must also say that I approve of the simplicity here. When I look at high-end shoes with variable-density and multi-directional weaves in the upper, I sometimes wonder if this is just technology for its own sake, and if a similar end could be achieved more simply. The Rocket X Trail demonstrates that less flashy construction can work just as well.
Dom: Finally, the shape of the Rocket X Trail toebox disappointed me. Hoka shoes have never felt like a particularly good match to the shape of my foot, but on the whole I’ve found them tolerable. For some reason, the toebox in the RXT feels more pointy than other Hoka shoes, most notably the Tecton X 3. As I was running, I was persistently aware of the shoe pressing my big toe inward. If your feet have grown over the years to be shoe-shaped, this likely won’t annoy you.
Personally, I’m one of the weirdos who employs dubious strategies like toe spacers, wearing as few closed-toe shoes as possible, and shoes that allow toes to straighten out in order to encourage my feet to revert to a more ‘natural’ shape. While I’m an evangelist for more anatomically-shaped shoes (like Altra, Topo Athletic, and recent Inov8), I’ve been delighted to notice that more brands are using lasts that allow a little more space for the big toe to straighten. (I’m thinking specifically of VJ Ultra 3 and On Cloud Ultra Pro). I don’t see why Hoka cannot do the same.
Midsole & Platform
Jen: The superfoam A-TPU midsole here is light, firm, and bouncy. In an A/B test run with the Tecton X 3, the midsole of the X3 was much more compressible, while the Rocket X feels stiffer especially under the forefoot with its higher stack than Tecon X height and plate.
The ride is as energetic as you would expect from 42 mm of superfoam, especially on flat gravel, non-technical singletrack, or roads. I actually liked it much more than expected on the road sections of some road-to-trail recovery runs.
Stability was a key question for me, as with all of the recent high-stack trail supershoes. The carbon-fiber element here morphs from the parallel plates of the Tecton X3 to an H shape, perhaps to stabilize via the crossbar. I didn’t find a noticeable difference in stability, however, meaning that I had a moderate likelihood of an ankle roll on any given day when things got technical.
The combination of width/height/rigidity makes the Rocket X feel fantastic when picking up the pace on flatter terrain, its intended use case. When you can really open up your stride and not worry about footing, this shoe is a lot of fun.
On the flip side, the lack of groundfeel and flexion makes it less well-suited to anything rocky.
Although the Rocket X made a notable appearance in Fuzhao Xiang’s Western States performance (2nd in 16:47) this year, she didn’t switch into it until after the more technical high country and canyons sections, suggesting that she may have felt similarly.
Sam: One giant of a shoe.
To go with heights we also have a very very broad platform at 100 mm heel / 85 mm midfoot / 125 mm forefoot which clearly can help stability along with the H shape carbon plate. I say potentially as a rigid carbon plate in such a giant stack height shoe likely would be a no go on anything other than road. Fortunately, the shoe and plate have some flex.
Trail “feel” one has to forget about it here. The massive stack of very reactive, decently firm foam is in no way mushy and is incredibly protective of the legs. The A-TPU foam is in my view the best of the current foams for its highly reactive and springy, decently soft and pulled together in feel. Not overly bouncy feel or for that matter overly firm either. Super fun and manageable
This midsole and platform is all about maximum cushioning due to the height and breadth of the 125mm platform up front with a distinct sense of rebounding and rolling forward decisively on more mellow surfaces and for many hours. There is enough stability (and so much more than say the road Adizero Prime X or even for me the Terrex Speed Ultra) for me to navigate easier trails.
The broad 100mm heel landings ( I am a heel striker at most moderate paces) are commendably stable. When combined with the very light weight for so much shoe, the turnover is surprisingly quick and exciting if not exactly agile, helped by the front rocker, the light weight and the dynamic A-TPU foam.
Yes, it is a "trail" shoe but the smooth trails, paved road and gravel ride is also where it really shines. All that foam and the front rocker can be fully leveraged and the shoe tracks straight and smooth at a very wide range of paces and without having to have “special” focus at every step as most of the first generation of carbon trail super shoes required.
Jeff V: The A-TPU midsole is remarkably good here. While the stack is very tall, it is firm, responsive and bouncy without being overly so. The feel is quite energetic and propulsive, well cushioned without any mushy feel and quite stable when going fast on less technical trails and even performs surprisingly well on moderately technical trails.
As I mentioned in the upper section, the Rocket X is out of its range on technical terrain, which I knew going in, but I still had to push the limits to see what they could do. With great care, I could negotiate steep, rocky technical trails at moderate speeds for a short while without any real issues, but because they are rigid and with such a big stack, they just are not conforming or agile enough to push in this sort of terrain.
Running fast on less technical trails, particularly on smooth singletrack or dirt roads, rolling on moderate inclines, declines, this is where the Rocket X really shines. They have a light feel and are very responsive, stable, well cushioned but on the firm side and are well equipped for runs of any length at faster speeds.
Adam: There are two things that make the Rocket X midsole unlike any other shoe I’ve tested. The first is the geometry, and the second is the A-TPU foam.
This is the first shoe I had tried with an A-TPU midsole. I’ve found supercritical foams and PEBA are often really soft and low density, as a way of reducing weight. While this provides excellent cushioning, as a larger and more power-focused runner, I often feel like they squish too much and don’t feel as good accelerating, decelerating, climbing, or turning, which happens a lot on trails.
Firmer but still responsive, damped, and efficient foams are what made me love the Salomon S/Lab Pulsar 4 so much. A-TPU is definitely firmer than other super foams I’ve tried, reminding me of Asics FF-Turbo in the Metaspeed Sky, or Saucony’s Powerrun PB in the Endorphin Speed and Pro, coincidentally some of my favorite road super shoes.
The low density of A-TPU has allowed Hoka to create the geometry of this shoe without it being unreasonably heavy. With a massive stack height, wide heel for landing stability on descents, and a stabilizing plate that is buried deep enough in the middle to smooth out its rocker feeling at slower paces, the result of all this innovation is a shoe that cruises as effortlessly at 6 minute pace on pavement, as it does 15 miles into a trail race.
This could be one of my favorite road shoes, and yet it’s perfectly comfortable on dirt and gravel. The cushion is unmatched by any other shoe I’ve tested, and yet it's able to give you immense responsiveness when you choose to pick up the pace.
You do pay a price, which is that there’s basically no ground feel, the combination of the plate and stack height eliminate that, and similarly, I wouldn’t choose this midsole for rocky, rooty, or muddy terrain, but for dry rolling trails near my home in California, it’s spectacular.
Dom: Back in the day, trail shoes were all pretty terrible: heavy and clunky. Like many runners, I’ve used a ton of ‘road’ shoes to race on trail, and wondered frequently why running shoe brands don’t just take a road shoe and slap a lugged outsole on it, perhaps reinforcing the upper slightly. The Rocket X Trail is one of the few examples where it seems like the shoe’s designers did exactly that. And the result? A shoe that is very strong on road and smooth trails, but not so great when the terrain gets spicy. An example of ‘be careful what you ask for?’
Dom: In addition to being more comfortable on flatter ground, I’m guessing that the Rocket X Trail is a better match for heel strikers. I predominantly land on my forefoot, and thought the heel of the RXT felt too bulky: a hump that I had to surmount before getting weight on the front of the shoe. With a little more heel rocker and a few millimeters less stack in the back, I think the shoe would feel more nimble and flow better.
Outsole
Jen: The zonal rubber outsole features 3 mm lugs primarily in the forefoot, with just a smattering in the midfoot and heel. While the Tecton X3 outsole featured a nearly-full-coverage Vibram outsole with 4 mm plus Traction Lug min lugs, the outsole here is towards the minimal side. It provides traction that’s completely adequate for gravel roads, but a little lacking on steep or loose trails. I haven’t tried it in wet conditions yet.
Sam: The outsole is for sure low profile at 3mm and with quite minimal coverage, in line with the goal of reducing weight. That said, because of the wide platform at the ground and the sharp angular lugs, the grip on light gravel, hard dirt and pavement in dry conditions to date has been excellent and also quiet on pavement. Further the outsole plays well with the foam above not over stiffening the shoe, there is actually some flex despite the giant stack height.
Jeff V: The 3mm lugs here are in line and appropriate for the purpose of this shoe. They are very much adequate on packed trails, dirt roads, roads, hard surfaces and in most circumstances where conditions are not particularly steep or loose. I have tested the shoe on steep, loose terrain and they actually gripped reasonably well, where the tread pattern is versatile and the rubber is sticky. The tread is laid out strategically to optimize weight reduction, so there is a fair bit of exposed foam, but have not found that to necessarily be an issue in either traction or durability (and also allows for some flex).
Adam: I agree with Jeff that the lugs match the purpose. If I’m running on mud, rocks, or roots that require more traction than this, running in a shoe with this much stack and cushion probably isn’t a great idea for that terrain. That said, on pavement, dirt, gravel, and light trail, the outsole is very effective, providing good grip and acceleration without a ton of additional weight or drag. I haven’t seen a ton of wear in the non-tread areas of the outsole, but will have to continue to evaluate the durability over time.
Dom: The outsole is probably the only aspect of the Rocket X Trail where I have no complaints. As the others have pointed out above, coverage is limited, and lugs are small. But there’s enough outsole to get you through all but the most challenging conditions without any nasty surprises. Given Hoka’s description of the RXT as a shoe for “buff dirt and gravel roads”, the lightweight outsole design seems right on the money.
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Jen: The Rocket X Trail is a truly fit-for-purpose shoe. Designed for gravel racing, it shines on non-technical hard surfaces where the superfoam/carbon plate can fully deliver. It’s fast, but not particularly agile. Still, runners who have a flat, fast ultra on deck or who do a lot of speedwork on gravel roads may find it a perfect match.
Jen’s score: as a trail shoe *.15/10; as a road/gravel shoe 9.5/10
Ride (30%): 7.5 (lack of stability on trail, feels a bit big and clunky for my taste) - 9.5 on road/flat gravel
Fit (30%): 8.5 (very comfortable, good lock down through the midfoot, but sizing seems a little off)
Value (10%): 8, higher if road/gravel given better performance there and comparison to other trainers with this much superfoam
Style (5%): 8.5
Traction (15%): 7.5, 10 if considered a road/gravel shoe
Rock Protection (10%): 10 (I barely feel the ground through that much superfoam and plate)
😊😊😊 (trail), 😊😊😊😊.5 road/gravel
Sam: I have run the Rocket X Trail more than usual for a review shoe as a) I liked its energetic protective and propulsive ride so much and b) most of my recent running has been on gravel roads and paths, smooth forest and lots of road, all areas where it shines. In fact, of all the recent super max road shoes such as Skyward X, Prime X Strung, Hyperion Max, and even Sonicblast, it is my favorite. Why? Light weight, huge dynamic cushioning, forgiving carbon plate, smooth on road, big grip outsole which makes it terrain versatile and easy to roll slow or fast from my tendency to heel strike.
This exact shoe with a bit less outsole could be called a Skyward X 2. Its upper is superior, its foam and plate package yet better integrated and even, as is, we are 42g lighter.
Wait, this thing is called Rocket X Trail. Right?
Yes, it is also a fine trail shoe for moderate smooth terrain for me. It is plenty stable but its sheer height and relative softness make them at least, in sensation, tippy as soon as surfaces get more irregular. I have yet to push them hard on technical terrain and probably won’t as I have many other choices for that and their strength is elsewhere. My New Hampshire trails are rocky, rooty and irregular so it is not my first pick for there but I can’t wait to get them to Park City smooth groomed single tracks where they will for sure come into their element.
It is for me it is one the best gravel type shoe of the year and one the best if not the best road super max shoes of 2025 given its pace and terrain versatility, supreme cushion, and fun bold energetic ride.
Sam’s Score: 9.6 /10 ( despite its “Trail” naming I am scoring it as a gravel, easy trails and road shoe for now)
😊😊😊😊😊
Jeff V: The Rocket X is certainly one of the most fun and exciting shoes I have run in this year. While not ideally suited for my day to day runs on steep, technical trails, they are a real blast for less steep and less technical trails, when I want to push fast, or, just wear a maximal shoe that runs particularly light and moves along very easily and efficiently, no matter the pace.
I could easily see picking the Rocket X for any race that is mid to long distance as long as it is not too technical, or they really just work great as a daily uptempo moderate to light trail, or gravel, door to trail trainer. While the stack is tall and I find them to be a bit too stiff for technical terrain, they are surprisingly stable if not leaping and balancing rock to rock for example, as they just eat up and steamroll the smaller rocks, bumps and undulations. The upper is very minimal, breathability is excellent, yet comfortable and effective at keeping the foot well planted and secure.
Overall the Rocket X Trail is an impressive max stack, very versatile supershoe that can balance a wide range of paces and terrain.
Jeff V’s Score: 9.6/10
Ride: 9.5 - Fast, smooth, efficient, cushioned
Fit: 9.75 - sizing confusion aside, once you get your size, fit is amazing
Value: 9 - $250 is just the going rate for carbon plated super shoes. These are so versatile.
Style: 9
Traction: 9.5 - for the intended purpose of the shoe, very good
Rock Protection: 10
😊😊😊😊😊
Adam: On my second run in these shoes, I liked them so much that I decided to use them for a 50km race. They felt fantastic, and left me with no blisters, no rolled ankles, and far less sore overall than I expected to be. It’s rare that my long run cushioned shoe also feels fast and versatile enough for race day.
The real question about the Rocket X Trail is what sort of terrain you run on regularly. If your nearby running trails include fire roads, or are smooth enough you could ride them on a gravel bike or run them in a stable pair of road shoes, these would be well suited to it.
In the Appalachian mountains of New Hampshire where I grew up, they’re lacking ground feel and too tall, but for the rolling trails of the Bay Area, they feel precisely engineered with some of the best technology I’ve experienced in a shoe for miles and miles of fun. The Rocket X trail is what I would consider a gravel shoe. It would be one of my favorite if not my favorite road shoe of the year for half marathon distances and above, but it’s capable of much more than that.
Adam G’s Score: 9.7 / 10
Ride: 10 - Fast, smooth, efficient, cushioned
Fit: 9.5 - Size up 0.5, and it’s pretty great.
Value: 9 - $250 It’s expensive, but if you have the right terrain, worth it
Style: 9
Traction: 9.5 - for the intended purpose of the shoe, very good
Rock Protection: 10
😊😊😊😊😊
Dom: I was less enthusiastic about the Rocket X Trail than the other RTR reviewers. For me, it seemed to be trying to solve a problem that I don’t have. On smooth ground, it felt too bulky and heel-heavy for my taste. And on technical terrain, it was notably mediocre: the combination of a high stack, stiff sole, and minimal ground feel did not inspire confidence. I’m sure the RXT is a solid shoe that a lot of runners will like, but it just didn’t land for me.
Dom’s score: 8 / 10
Ride: 8/10 - Bouncy, fast and fun. But really only for mellow terrain, and better-suited to heel-strikers.
Fit: 8/10 - Decent width, excellent foot retention, but too much toe-smushing for my taste.
Value: 7/10 - In line with other high-end supershoes, without the performance to justify price.
Traction: 9/10 - Solid, and good enough for intended use.
Rock Protection: 10/10 - With tons of foam and a plate, you won’t feel a thing.
😊😊😊
Hoka Rocket X Trail in profile: look at how flat the heel is compared to other ‘supershoes’
8 Comparisons
Hoka Tecton X 3 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: I personally find the Rocket X Trail to be faster, more propulsive and a more fun, dynamic ride, but more door to trail, gravel, moderate trails. If you favor more technical trails however, the Tecton is more trim and agile, with better traction and a very helpful built in gaiter (one of the best out there).
Jen: I agree with Jeff that the Tecton X 3 is a better fit for technical trails. The narrower fit and lower stack height lend stability and agility that are lacking in the Rocket X. I’d reach for the Rocket X on road or gravel, but the Tecton X 3 on most trails.
Dom: I think the Tecton X 3 is a better shoe. The weight of both shoes is basically identical, but the RXT has more cushion. While that sounds like it should be an advantage of the RXT, the TX3 has enough cushion and protection to run as long as you want over pretty much any terrain, so why would you want more? The higher stack of the RXT just makes it less stable. Additionally, I didn’t like the extra width of the RXT heel (this just makes the back end of the shoe feel cumbersome, and is a real disadvantage in off-camber and uneven terrain) and I found the toebox of the RXT rubbed on the medial side of my big toe. The TX3 has a built-in gaiter to keep out debris: I appreciate this, but I know some runners would prefer not to have it. Another criticism leveled at the TX3 is that it can feel a little soft and mushy; the RXT cushioning is slightly firmer.
The Rocket X Trail heel (right) is clearly significantly larger overall than the Tecton X 3 (left). What’s surprising is that the width of the outsole (measured at its widest point) is the same.
Adidas Terrex Agravic Speed Ultra (RTR Review)
Dom: The Adidas Terrex Agravic Speed Ultra is arguably the most successful high-end ultra race shoe of the last couple of years. Both the Rocket X Trail and ASU are pricey, carbon-plated, superfoamed trail racers. The ASU is not a warm hug of a shoe: it has a minimal upper with very little stretch, and with difficult sizing; it is more heavily rockered than anything else on the trails. What’s undeniable is that the ASU is (1) very fast at high speeds, and (2) unforgiving. Personally, I like the relatively narrow heel, which makes the shoe light and nimble, but some runners struggle with it. If you prefer trail shoes with wide, flared heels, the Rocket X Trail may be a better choice. The two shoes are basically identical in weight, but the RXT has more cushion, particularly in the heel. RXT has a little more forefoot rocker and much less at the rear. At $220 USD, the ASU also has a slight edge on price, compared to $250 for RXT.
Hoka Mafate 5 (RTR Review)
Sam: Much heavier at 10.85 oz / 308g US 9 and more aggressively 5mm MegaGrip lugged the latest Mafate has plush mostly supercritical foam underfoot, a plastic ¾ plate and a similar fitting (although TTS unlike Rocket X Trail) somewhat more rugged upper. While the Rocket X Trail is the long run on smooth and even pavement option, the Mafate is the long on the most technical terrain Hoka option.
Jeff V: Agreed with Sam. Mafate 5 is heavier and more geared towards more rugged, technical trails with a more beefed up and protective build, superior traction. Rocket X much better for going fast on less technical terrain.
On Cloudultra Pro (RTR Review)
Jen: The Cloudultra Pro was designed with UTMB in mind, and correspondingly performs much better on steep or technical trails than the Rocket X Trail. With a slightly lower stack height (38.5 mm) and slightly narrower base throughout, it is a little easier to maneuver and has the same impressive lightness for the amount of cushion. Runners with low to medium volume feet or who hit trails at least occasionally may favor the Cloudultra Pro over the Rocket X.
Dom: The On Cloudultra Pro is a much better shoe at an identical weight to the Rocket X Trail. While both shoes are bouncy and fast on smooth ground, the Rocket X may have an edge, particularly if you are a heel striker. On trails, it’s not even close. The CUP rolls more smoothly, feels more nimble, and has more outsole coverage. The CUP last is more asymmetric, providing additional room for your big toe. The only downside of the CUP is that the upper is excessively ventilated, and lets in a lot of dust.
TNF Vectiv Pro 2 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: I find the Vectiv Pro to be more rigid and does not do as well on varied terrain (which is saying a lot). The Rocket X is more propulsive, better cushioned and more friendly for longer runs and faster paces.
TNF Vectiv Pro 3 (RTR Review soon)
Jen: I haven’t put quite enough miles on the Pro 3 for a full review yet, but so far it’s a very comparable shoe to the Rocket X Trail. The Rocket X does feel more cushioned and energetic on hard surfaces, and both feel most at home on gravel or non-technical trail.
Dom: Like Jen, I’ve not put many miles on the TNF Vectiv Pro 3, but I will say that it’s a significantly heavier shoe (at 11.4 oz vs 9.9 oz, 324 vs 298 g in size US M10 – 10.5 in RXT). It also has a grippier outsole with more coverage. The most notable aspect of the VP3 is that it has two, vertically-stacked carbon plates. All of this adds up to a shoe that is built like a tank.
VJ Ultra 3 (RTR Review)
Jeff V: The Ultra 3 is much more appropriately designed for more technical terrain, as it is much slimmer, agile and stable in technical terrain, with far superior traction. The Rocket X is better for less technical terrain at faster paces.
Dom: The VJ Ultra 3 is unplated, and ranks with the La Sportiva Prodigio Pro and Norda 001A or 005 as a top choice for those who are (rightly) skeptical about the benefits of a plated trail shoes. I much prefer the last of the VJ, which has a more asymmetric toebox. It also has better ground feel and astonishing grip. The Rocket X Trail wins on smooth ground.
New Balance SC Trail (RTR Review)
Adam: The SC trail tries to do something similar to the Rocket X Trail, using a similar carbon plate, and responsive foam, but ends up being much less fast and fun. On more technical terrain, the lower stack and more structured upper rewards the SC trail, but it’s a much slower and heavier shoe, and not one I’d choose to race over the Rocket X.
Dom: For me, the SC Trail was a near miss. On paper, It had all the ingredients of an outstanding shoe, but the whole was somehow less than the sum of the parts.
Saucony Endorphin Edge (RTR Review)
Adam: A-TPU actually reminds me a lot of Saucony’s Powerrun PB in running feel. The Edge has much more aggressive traction and a lower stack height. It feels like a fast and responsive shoe, but one that is hard on the calves for distances above a half marathon. Given the more advanced and lighter foam of the Endorphin Edge, I’d pick the Rocket X unless I was in really muddy, rocky, or rooty conditions.
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Very limited release Sept 1 release
Tester Profiles
Jennifer Schmidt found trail running in her mid-20's and began dabbling on the roads a few years later. Trail 50k's are nearest and dearest to her heart, and she recently won the 2025 Way Too Cool 50k and Silver State 50k and placed fifth at the 2025 Tamalpa Headlands 50k (USATF national championships) and sixth at the 2025 Black Canyon Ultras 50k. These days, you can find her primarily on the sweet California singletrack around Auburn, chasing competitive and personal goals over a variety of surfaces and distances. Depending on the season, she also competes in the USATF road and XC circuits for Sacramento Running Association's racing team, with a marathon PR of 2:41.
Jeff Valliere loves to run and explore the mountains of Colorado, the steeper and more technical the better. He has summited all of the 14ers in the state, many 13ers and other peaks in Colorado and beyond, plus, he has summited his local Green Mountain over 2,300 times in the past 20+ years. He can be found on mountain trails daily, no matter the weather, season, conditions or whether there is daylight or not. On the side he loves to ski (all forms) bike and hike, often with his family, as he introduces his twin daughters to the outdoors. Jeff was born and raised in New Hampshire, but has called Colorado home for nearly 30 years. He is 5’9” and 145 lbs.
Sam is the Editor and Founder of Road Trail Run. He is in his 60’s with 2025 Sam’s 54th year of running roads and trails. He has a decades old 2:28 marathon PR. These days he runs halves in the just sub 1:43 range if he gets very, very lucky. Sam trains 30-40 miles per week mostly at moderate paces on the roads and trails of New Hampshire and Utah be it on the run, hiking or on nordic skis. He is 5’9” tall and weighs about 160 lbs, if he is not enjoying too many fine New England IPA’s.
Adam Glueck (6’0 205 lbs) is a trail and mountain runner currently based in California. He recently graduated from Dartmouth College in 2022, where he competed in Nordic Ski racing, racing in NCAAs twice and on the national Supertour and international Ski Classic Marathon circuit. When he’s not engineering, Adam now races trail running over distances from 5k to 50k, and you’ll find exploring new trails from Yosemite to Moosilauke to Marin to Hong Kong.
Dom 51, trains and competes mainly on trails in Southern California. In 2017 he was 14th at Western States 100 and in 2018 finished 50th at UTMB and 32nd at the 2018 Los Angeles marathon in a time of 2:46. In 2019, his only notable finish was at the multi-day Dragon’s Back race in the UK. In 2022 Dom finished 4th in the Angeles Crest 100 and was 10th in his age group at UTMB. In 2025 Dom won the Ray Miller 50 Mile in California.
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
No comments:
Post a Comment